Democrats & Liberals Archives

The Definition of Insanity

A nation gripped by fear laid down upon it not by terrorism but by the political machinations of a reelection juggernaut may finally be jolted from it’s paralysis.

The indictment of the aid to Vice President Cheney this week and the masterful press conference of the prosecutor have finally, it seems, given the nation pause.

The big questions: why was a top White House official giving classified information to reporters? Why did the White House pay so much attention to an unknown former diplomat? And why out his wife? And if the yellowcake uranium from Niger story is a put up job, then which other arguments for invading Iraq were put up jobs as well?

Jonathan Alter offers some perspective in today's Newsweek:

According to Fitzgerald, Libby had conversations with at least seven other government officials about Joseph and Valerie Wilson that he did not disclose to the grand jury. Why were top White House officials and Vice President Cheney so concerned about an obscure former diplomat like Wilson? Because he had the temerity to offer public dissent. By showing how evidence of Saddam's WMDs had been cooked, Wilson undermined the very reason Augie Schroeder and the rest of the U.S. military went to war. He was more than "fair game," as Karl Rove called him. He was a mortal threat.

This has been the Bush pattern. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill presciently says a second tax cut is unaffordable if we want to fight in Iraq—he's fired. Bush's economic adviser Larry Lindsey presciently says the war will cost between $100 billion and $200 billion (an underestimate)—he's fired. Army Gen. Eric Shinseki presciently says that winning in Iraq will require several hundred thousand troops—he's sent into early retirement. By contrast, CIA Director George Tenet, who presided over two of the greatest intelligence lapses in American history (9/11 and WMD in Iraq) and apparently helped spread "oppo ammo" to discredit the husband of a woman who had devoted her life to his agency, receives the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Some might write this off to the hard ball game of politics in Washington. Except the demand for loyalty above everything else has up until now obscured the fundamental incompetence and dangerous insulation from critical discussion at the highest levels of the US government.

We've been watching the quagmire of Iraq unfold mercilessly before our eyes. The massive onslaught of hurricanes leaving so many of our fellow citizens helpless while a hapless FEMA neglects it's duties. A national debt that has once again spiraled out of control while another Republican President signs spending bill after spending bill...tax cut after tax cut.

This has been allowed to take place under our noses because of men like Karl Rove...who instill fear of brown people in robes to the electorate. And then put up their guy as the only patriot who can possibly deal with the scourge. To prop Bush up as this lone patriotic figure is a feat indeed. A man without curiosity or a breadth of intellectuality is a tough sell. Absolute loyalty and lockstep message control has to take place.

And in the meantime anyone who speaks up is an unAmerican, unpatriotic, yellow-bellied leech who is sucking off the very teat of the freedom provided to them by the Cowboy-in-Chief.

Alter's piece in Newsweek also includes a quote from a father who lost his son in Iraq:

"When you do something over and over again expecting a different result," Augie's grieving father, Paul, told me, "that is the definition of insanity."

Indeed. When Americans reelected George W. Bush to the presidency after a truely horrible first term expecting him to do better, that was insanity. But maybe...finally...the people and the press have decided that being whipped into a state of fear-riddled paralysis is no way to live. And no way to elect a President.

Posted by Carla Ryan at October 30, 2005 1:20 PM
Comments
Comment #88988

HEAR HEAR!!!!
Maybe now we can have a more in-depth investigation of how the election was rigged in the first place (See Five-Star Corp., Dallas Texas), the relationships between the Bush family and Diebold Corp, The Saudi Royals and the Carlyle Group…Better late than never. This Fitzgerald guy seems honest and un-bribe/unthreaten-able to handle the job.

Posted by: capnmike at October 30, 2005 4:37 PM
Comment #88990

The truly amazing thing that has not been said by Bush and Co. is a decent apology to Valeria Plame. Here was a woman who dedicated her life via a career in the CIA for this country, only to have her career destroyed in the name of hard-ball politics. There is no mention of remorse, or even concern of the fact that someone in the administration has committed a crime. Cheney lauds Libby’s service to this country without mention of the service provided by Plame and Wilson. Bush, Cheney, and the gaggle of press lackeys only hope to do damage control at any price. The level of hypocrisy in this administration is beyond believable. It;s all too sad that the administration has caused most Americans to be so afraid of the boogeyman du jour, that they can’t see the obvious in front of their faces. A sad time in America indeed.

Posted by: slammer at October 30, 2005 4:44 PM
Comment #88998

Wonderful piece Ms. Ryan. It won’t be long before the troglodyte lurkers come along and try to confuse the issues…Plame wasn’t THAT undercover…perjury isn’t a REAL offense…it’s Clinton’s fault…and other such tired crap they got from Rush or O’Reilly and designed to prop up their floundering fool in the White House. Continually proven wrong - sometimes disastrously, it is time the be ignored completely and relegated back to the fringe where they came from. The time of the push-over liberal is over and if the rapture right doesn’t like it, they can shove it.

This has been a wonderful week for those of us who allow reason, truth, sanity, true moral values and decency towards others to rule our arguments. Chickens are coming home to roost and we can and should shout loudly: WE TOLD YOU SO. However, unless we hold the Democratic party’s feet to the fire (see Bill’s excellent talk in Austin yesterday http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Clinton-Book-Festival.html) to stand up for our values, it will all be for naught.

There are fundamental issues out there that deserve the unwavering support of the Democratic party: universal health care, recognition of a constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy, reinstatement of the assault weapons ban, New Deal-style jobs programs, repeal of the ridiculous Bush tax cuts, reinvestment in the American infrastructure (and not just bridges in Alaska to enrich the Murkowski family), and repeal of the recent bankruptcy and energy bills just to name a few. Frankly, if the Democrats cannot bravely stand up and support these issues then not only will my financial support for them dry up completely, but I’ll be certain to find a new party after the 2006 election. I can only hope others do the same. Without a strong voice from the side of reason, America will wither on the vine.

Posted by: roger at October 30, 2005 5:39 PM
Comment #89007

One thing that puzzles me about this whole affair… If you punish Wilson by outing his wife, doesn’t it occur to you that making the info public will eventually get back to you? Is there a point where you worry that you’ll get caught?

I would apreciate some feedback from the wise souls on this blog. This is the kind of stuff that really ruins my morning shower time.

Posted by: Loren at October 30, 2005 7:02 PM
Comment #89012

Look at what you actually got. Libby is indicted (not convicted) of perjury. Nobody else is indicted. The prosecutor specifically does not address the outing. The person who first wrote the story (Novak) presumably cooperated with the grand jury. The prosecutor knows Novak’s source and still didn’t indict anybody.

If the grand jury investigated Wilson, they would find the inconsistency in his statements. His trip to Niger did not disprove anything Bush said, as the bipartisan commission discovered.

This is all you get boys and girls. It will take you awhile to figure this out and the nuttier among you will continue to spin conspiracy theories, as they do about all the elections they lose.

Posted by: Jack at October 30, 2005 8:24 PM
Comment #89021

Jack,
What about “Official A”? Remember, Novak identified “senior officials” as the source for his treasonous act.

What happens if Libby plea bargains? If so, who do you think he’ll turn in?

Or do you expect a trial?

It’s not the end, Jack. It’s the beginning.

Posted by: phx8 at October 30, 2005 8:44 PM
Comment #89022

Loren, I think your answer is that until recently, utter hubris has kept this administration from being at all concerned about getting caught. You see, they’ve been able to carry on for five years now with absolute impunity by virtue of a cowed press and a toothless opposition party that did nothing in the face of things like stolen elections and no-bid contracts to cronies. They had no reason to act legally, morally or ethically when simply smearing those who dared to question them worked so well. Well, they do now.

Hey Jack, nice job proving my point, thanks! Did you quote Hannity exactly or was it a paraphrase?

Posted by: roger at October 30, 2005 8:59 PM
Comment #89027

I think we will learn alot when joe wilson files a civel lawsuit against rove libby cheney and bush

Posted by: tom at October 30, 2005 9:27 PM
Comment #89029

ROger

It just makes sense. You guy have been talking about things that are not in evidence for so long you all believe it.

I didn’t see Hannity, but if he said what I did I agree with him. I did see Bill Krisol today and he pointed out that if this was meant as a smear of Wilson, it wasn’t very good. They talked to several people who wrote nothing. Novak wrote the name as a sideline comment.

If Wilson went to Niger to serve his country, his duty ended when he made his report. His colleagues at CIA processed his information and made their report to the president. Decisions were based on this analysis. If Wilson had planned to influence this decision, why wait until May, months after the invasion?

Posted by: Jack at October 30, 2005 9:46 PM
Comment #89033

Please peddle your dogma elsewhere. Your time is done.

Posted by: roger at October 30, 2005 10:11 PM
Comment #89037

Roger

You have no right to ask that and I have no obligation to comply. I consider the source and the evident frustration, so I forgive you.

Posted by: Jack at October 30, 2005 10:16 PM
Comment #89038

I didn’t see Hannity, but if he said what I did I agree with him. I did see Bill Krisol today and he pointed out that if this was meant as a smear of Wilson, it wasn’t very good. They talked to several people who wrote nothing. Novak wrote the name as a sideline comment.

If it wasn’t a smear, then why go after Wilson’s wife? I watched Kristol this morning as well. His defense was weak, especially compared to Juan Williams’ quite articulate rebuttal that all the White House had to do was say Wilson was wrong and prove why. Instead, they ruthlessly went after Wilson and his wife.

If Wilson went to Niger to serve his country, his duty ended when he made his report. His colleagues at CIA processed his information and made their report to the president. Decisions were based on this analysis. If Wilson had planned to influence this decision, why wait until May, months after the invasion?

What does that have to do with outing Wilson’s wife? Why would that be necessary under the circumstances you outline above?

Posted by: carla at October 30, 2005 10:36 PM
Comment #89040

My sincere apologies Jack. You have every right to open yourself to ridicule and laughter in a forum where the truth actually means something. Please feel free to peddle your dogma and I will take my own advice from here on and ignore it in favor of reasoned discussion. My apologies as well to the other posters in here for allowing myself to fall into the trap of a battle of intellect with an unarmed person. I will continue it no further.

Posted by: roger at October 30, 2005 10:45 PM
Comment #89052

Wow. Excellent article, Carla.

This has been allowed to take place under our noses because of men like Karl Rove…who instill fear of brown people in robes to the electorate. And then put up their guy as the only patriot who can possibly deal with the scourge.

Yeah, that’s an old trick, isn’t it. And apparently universal. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad gets elected to crack down on corruption and improve Iranian’s lives, achieves zero, and so starts talking up war with Israel and the US to distract Iranian voters.

“Yes, death to Israel! Death to Ameri… Hey, wait a minute… I still can’t afford food, shelter, or healthcare. Doh!” :/

Amazing how many people all over the world are susceptable to that kind of manipulation from a leader.

Posted by: American Pundit at October 31, 2005 12:30 AM
Comment #89054

Roger, don’t ignore it; debunk it. It’s a little tedious sometimes, and it’s not going to change Jack’s mind, but there are thousands of people who read this blog every day to help sort the facts from the spin.

Posted by: American Pundit at October 31, 2005 12:34 AM
Comment #89073

Roger,

The fear is palpable isn’t it? I mean the leftist fear that the utopia will never come because some of us don’t believe in it.

This is something that puzzles me about the left. How they can hold up ‘dissent’ on one hand as a holy act of sacrament to the religion of progressivism and then say things like:

Please peddle your dogma elsewhere. Your time is done.

‘Shut up’ isn’t much of an argument.

I’ve found jack to be rational and fair, he articulates his position in other words, whether you agree with it or not.

Posted by: esimonson at October 31, 2005 5:14 AM
Comment #89082
This is all you get boys and girls.

Jack,

Who is your source in the special prosecutor’s office? It is being widely reported that Fitzgerald is still looking at indicting Rove. Apparently you have a more reliable source who is telling you otherwise…

Even if only Libby is indicted, the White House will be under a lot of scrutiny. It is funny how many right-wing editorials I have seen about how “Bush haters” are or should be disappointed. (Maybe it calms right-wingers to think that liberals are even more disturbed than they are.) I don’t see why there should be disappointment. So far this isn’t developing any differently than Watergate. It is usually the coverup that gets people in trouble. I would bet that the crimes Libby was indicted for carry a heavier sentence than the crime of leaking.

Posted by: Woody Mena at October 31, 2005 7:41 AM
Comment #89087

Woody

A lot of people seem to think they have a source in the prosecutors office.

There has been little else on this blog and in much of the media but speculation. Let’s look at what we actually know.

Libby is indicted for perjury. Despite a long investigation, that is all we really know.

We think that Rove and other staff and Novak and other journalists cooperated with the investigation. Novak spent no time in jail. So we can conclude that Fitzgerald knows who leaked to Novak and has a good idea of who leaked to whom in general. Yet he indicted only Libby and that for perjury, not the underlying crime, if there was one.

That “if there was one” leads directly to the extrapolation for which we have no evidence. Liberals seem to know who revealed Plame. Fitzgerald never told us. They are also sure that this person broke the law. Fitzgerald never told us that either. He only told us that such things are serious. That particular law is ambiguous and so is Plame’s exact status. But you have drawn certainty where none exists. What you have is a long series of conditional probabilities that when finally summed up have almost no chance of actually happening.

So we know that Libby is indicted. That is all we know. We speculate on everything else. AND this is after an intense investigation. A reasonable person might conclude that this is not much of an outcome. Liberals have joyfully predicted there Fitzmas, but Santa left them a small bag of coal. They can hope for more from the Easter Bunny, but that seems to be the triumph of hope over experience.

Roger

Glad I got to you. I have that effect on liberals. Remember what Aristotle said about anger.

AP

Thanks … I guess. It is better to be talked about than not talked about.

Posted by: Jack at October 31, 2005 8:12 AM
Comment #89092

Are the people who refer to Valerie Plame as a “low level desk jockey” the same people who claim that she could authorize a trip to Africa for her husband? Is this one of those cases where when Republicans contradict themselves, it serves as proof that Democrats must be hypocrites?

Posted by: Mike at October 31, 2005 8:19 AM
Comment #89094
But you have drawn certainty where none exists. What you have is a long series of conditional probabilities that when finally summed up have almost no chance of actually happening.

You talkin’ to me? I believe my only assertions were that Libby was indicted and that the White House would be under a lot of scrutiny. Where is the long series of conditional probabilities?

(Technical point: I believe the probabilities you are talking about would be multiplied, not summed.)

You are kidding yourself with the lump of coal analogy. If it makes you happy to think some liberal out there is crying over his lump of coal, be my guest.

Posted by: Woody Mena at October 31, 2005 8:25 AM
Comment #89095

Mike

The Plame affair is a serious charge that is being seriouly investigated. The problem is that there is too much speculation passing for certainty about the outcome.

BTW - a mid-level official can’t authorize such a mission, but she sure cold influence such a decision. Plame is not low level, but she is also not high level. She is mid level. There are lots of such people in the Federal service. The chief qualification to attain that position is to live long enough and keep your job during that period.

The outing may or may not have been a crime. Nobody knows at this point. It has been investigated for a long time, but nobody knows. We should neither make too much nor too little of Plame herself i.e. don’t denegrate a successful woman, but don’t make her into James Bond either.

Posted by: Jack at October 31, 2005 8:33 AM
Comment #89099

Woody

You are right about the multiplication. Wasn’t thinking clearly.

Then we agree that all there is after two years of intense scrutiny is the indictment of one man for perjury and that we can only speculate on what might happen.

I guess we can all feel reasonably confident of the future, depending on how we interpret the one fact we have to work with. I would have to say, however, that there is not much to write about based on what we know.

Posted by: Jack at October 31, 2005 8:49 AM
Comment #89105

Dear American Pundit. I don’t disagree entirely. I have found that debunking them is pathetically easy (but yes, most definitely tedious). The problem is that reason is completely lost on the reactionary’s reptile brain - hence the inability to change their minds. I think it’s more important to just relegate them back to the fantasy land fringes where they resided until Reagan first taught them it was okay to hate and be selfish as long as you wrap yourself in the flag.

You’re right in that we should focus on our friends and neighbors who are open to truth but have suffered from understandable fear and subsequent Republican exploitation of 9/11. I just think we should take it to them directly. Now that conservatism’s real effects on our country are hitting them square in the face, that should not be too hard to do going forward.

One last thought…we have spent five years of having our patriotism and support for our soldiers blithely questioned by asses and fools. Can we please now all stand up and show a little righteous anger when said asses and fools pull that crap? Just because we’re better people doesn’t mean we can’t smack them right back down when they deserve it. As you can see above, they’re not used to it and thus easily become confused and unhinged rather quickly.

Posted by: roger at October 31, 2005 9:15 AM
Comment #89106

I learned 2 things from Patrick Fitzgerald on Friday.

1. I learned that Scooter Libby has changed his story so much that Fitzgerald wasn’t able to determine, with certainty, anything about the crime.

2. I learned that Patrick Fitzgerald’s voice sounds a lot like John Cusack’s voice.

Is it possible that John Cusack read the findings and then Patrick Fitzgerald lipsynched in order to protect Fitzgerald’s identity? It’s a question that you don’t hear asked too much.

Posted by: Mike at October 31, 2005 9:19 AM
Comment #89107

Please help in calling for the “outing” of the Energy Task Force papers that were never made public. These papers no doubt would shed even more light on the plans for war (and why the Bushies wanted it).

These are the ones with Ken Lay involved. We need a loud public outcry for these to be revealed in light of the new war revelations.

Posted by: dougb at October 31, 2005 9:23 AM
Comment #89108

Roger
I have been posting on this blog for more than a year. I have never accused anyone of lack of patriotism and have never directly criticized anyone personally. You can check the back issues for that. Actually I am used to such innuendo from people who don’t know me.

I don’t mind smacking down the opposition, but I try to do it with a little more class. I recognize that there is a legitimate difference of opinion. I have found some good ideas on the liberal side (I particularly like AP, Phx8, Stephen and David.) But I am not enthusiastic about stereotypes on the left or the right. I don’t hate people, BTW. Anger, stereotypes, and personal attack is not debunking.

Posted by: Jack at October 31, 2005 9:27 AM
Comment #89120

Tacking back to the initial considerations of this thread…perhaps the insanity can be brought to full light (including of course, Cheney’s Energy Task Force papers, Doub B) once the Democrats regain control over one of the Congressional houses. Only then can open and fair investigations happen and we can expose the Bush administration for all its lies and corruption. I believe that once the American public sees the facts instead of the whitewash they will realize the damage their Commander-in-Thief and his cohorts have done and summarily put adults back in charge…assuming of course Dieboldt doesn’t work their dark magic again.

Posted by: roger at October 31, 2005 11:07 AM
Comment #89156

Everyone:

It seems to me that the conservative right are pulling out every point they can possibly twist into some sort of argument to defend this administration.

I’ve gotta ask, “WHY?”

Isn’t this the same group that unwaiveringly supported Ken Starr and the (many) years and millions and millions of dollars he spent investigating Bill Clinton. When the only thing they could find to undermine him with was lying to a grand jury about consensual sex with Monica Lewensky, they IMPEACHED him. C’MON, that is something best left between Bill, Monica and Hillary. But, NO…..IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT! became their battle cry.

Now in light of ALL the evidence that has come to light about this administration, be it election-rigging-gate, Iraq-gate, Haliburton-gate, social security-gate, classified info-leak-gate, Katrina-gate, MASSIVE, MASSIVE DEBT-GATE or any of the many, many other controversial issues of the last 5 (almost 6) years, these are the same people who steadfastly defend this administration, and REFUSE to even CONSIDER that maybe, just maybe some of it is TRUE!

Where are their cries of “IMPEACH THE PRESIDENT?” Where is all the indignation with which they condemn their fellow citizens because some dare to disagree on political issues?

This is NO LONGER about politics and which side of center you fall, left or right. It is about what we ALL want for our country and our leaders. ACCOUNTABILITY!!!!!!

Jack,
Over and over you drone on about the inability to prove (to your satisfaction) any of the allegations against this administration.

WHY oh WHY are you not standing up and shouting for accountability? Why are you not DEMANDING the administration cooperate with these investigations?

If you and the rest of the right would STOP defending this administration and hold them as accountable as you would (and DO) the left, Maybe, just maybe there would be enough credible evidence to settle once and for all, innocence or guilt.

Don’t you really WANT to know the truth?

I DO!

sassyliberal

Posted by: sassyliberal at October 31, 2005 1:37 PM
Comment #89179

Sadly we can’t expect a desire for the truth from people who support leaders who question evolution, think Jesus wasn’t a full-on liberal, don’t understand why being pro-life should apply to capital punishment, or continue to link Saddam and Al Qaeda.

And then they wonder why, in some of our admittedly weaker moments, we stoop to calling them stupid…

Posted by: roger at October 31, 2005 3:36 PM
Comment #89215

Most of this discussion about Libby and who did what is pointless.

Libby will not plea out to the prosocutor as some have said may happen.

Libby will take the fall for what ever comes out of this leak case for the administration.

Libby will be tried, and if found guilty, will be pardoned by Bush before any jail time.

This is how it always works. Remember back to Oliver North, Pointdexter and Seacord.

This has been planned out way before any of us knew the outcome. Libby had already written his resignation letter before we knew he was in any trouble. The buck will stop with Libby. If for some unknown reason, Rove gets tragged into the mess. He too will be pardoned for his sins…

Posted by: Rusty at October 31, 2005 5:50 PM
Comment #89218

Roger

This is the last time I will tell you that your stereotype is just wrong. Check my writings on Saddam and Al Qaeda, or religion, or pro-life. Just for more stereotypes, I drive a Honda Hybrid (not a Hummer), when I don’t ride my bike to work. I plant trees for fun. I would more than match education, income and job experience in either your stronger or weaker moments.

I will be perfectly happy to address any of your real arguments, but we are done with the silliness. Have fun talking to yourself. I bet you are used to it.

Posted by: Jack at October 31, 2005 5:58 PM
Comment #89219

This is the last time I will tell you that your stereotype is just wrong. Check my writings on Saddam and Al Qaeda, or religion, or pro-life. Just for more stereotypes, I drive a Honda Hybrid (not a Hummer), when I don’t ride my bike to work. I plant trees for fun. I would more than match education, income and job experience in either your stronger or weaker moments.

I will be perfectly happy to address any of your real arguments, but we are done with the silliness. Have fun talking to yourself. I bet you are used to it.

Posted by: Jack at October 31, 2005 5:59 PM
Comment #89227

GIVE THE NATION PAUSE

To see that after 22months of investigating they couldn’t meet the standard set forth in the LAW. Either 1982 or 1917 to indict MR. Libby on the claims the media has played out over the last six months. Real smoking gun hear.

Posted by: CAD at October 31, 2005 6:45 PM
Comment #89297

Easy there Jack, don’t get your panties in a twist. I frankly could care less about your car, salary or education.

Read the post before whining: I did not stereotype you. I said you’re supporting leaders who subscribe to or allow for those ridiculous notions, hence rendering your idea of truth not worthy of attention.

Please read my other posts as well. In them you will find that I don’t care whether you want to address my arguments. If I did, I’d post in the Republicans forum. I am in a Democrats/Liberals forum and am here to talk to like-minded people. The arguments of you and the other right wing apologists mean nothing to me and I am going to continue to ignore them and plead as often as I can with my moderate and liberal compatriots to do the same.

Posted by: roger at November 1, 2005 12:12 AM
Comment #89328

This indictment is a bit like giving a speeding ticket to a fleeing bank robber.Compared to the rest of the Bush crime famlies activities it is nothing.
I am surprised at how many liberals seem to think that the neo-cons will simply give up power if we manage to vote(or have enough votes counted) to drive them out. Clearly there is no moral minimum here. They will do anything to maintain power. They have to or face justice.They will burn the Rieshtag. Are you ready?

Posted by: Bill Scanlan at November 1, 2005 6:36 AM
Comment #89353

Okay Roger. I win. Sorry we won’t be talking any more, but you can be sure that I will continue to write on this side of the blog and now bow to the censorship you have no right to impose.

Posted by: Jack at November 1, 2005 9:04 AM
Comment #89499

Another definition of insanity is watching Bush ask for more billions while continuing to push for more tax cuts.Must be nice to spend others money.

Posted by: Marko at November 1, 2005 4:33 PM
Comment #89516

I could have sworn the definition of insanity was to keep on doing the same things and expect different results. Best example: current administration.

Posted by: SirisC at November 1, 2005 5:45 PM
Comment #89655

What has been neglected here, and I think it’s important, is Fitzgerald’s baseball analogy about someone throwing sand in the umpire’s eyes. To continue the analogy, yes, absolutely someone hit a batter in the head with a ball. Whether or not that was illegal, has not been determined because of the sand in the umpire’s eyes. But we do know that throwing the sand in the ump’s eyes was illegal so THAT will be prosecuted. And through that prosecution, the motives of the pitcher will come out.
And fortunately, this prosecution will take place on the very public stage of the mid term elections. If you don’t think the administration and all the blind followers aren’t quaking in their boots at the thought of losing one of the houses (resulting in an inevitible legislative investigation of everything from that day in July of 2002 when Bush pre-saged his intentions to invade Iraq up to the stumble bum manner in which the war has been waged from day one to present), then you better think again. Such an investigation will likely result in the fall of the other house and the White House as well. And when THOSE indictments come out, I just hope the democrats have the cajones to bring the prosecution to the Bush doorstep.

Posted by: Thom Houts at November 2, 2005 6:40 AM
Post a comment